Background: An understanding of physical activity through mediators of behaviour change is important to evaluate the efficacy of interventions. The purpose of this review is to update prior reviews with meta-analysis in order to evaluate the state of physical activity interventions that include proposed mediators of behaviour change. Methods: Literature was identified through searching of five key databases. Studies were eligible if they described a published experimental or quasi-experimental trial in English examining the effect of an intervention on physical activity behaviour and mediators in non-clinical adult populations with the necessary statistical information to be included in the meta-analytic structural equation modelling analysis. Results: Fifty-one articles (49 samples) met the eligibility criteria. Small overall effects were identified for mediation paths a (r = .16; 95% CI = .10 to .22), b (r = .21; 95% CI .16 to .27), and c (r = .24; 95% CI .12 to .35), c' (r = .05 to .19) and ab (r = .02 to .07) that showed similar findings by theory and construct. Conclusion: The effect sizes seen in physical activity interventions are mediated by our current theories, but the effects are very small and no one construct/theory appears to be a critical driver of the mediated effect compared to any other. Innovation and increased fidelity of interventions is needed.
The physical, psychological, and economic benefits of regular moderate-to-vigorous-intensity physical activity are well substantiated. Unfortunately, few people in developed countries engage in enough physical activity to reap these benefits. Thus, a strong theoretical understanding of what factors are associated with physical activity is warranted in order to create effective and targeted interventions. Social/ecological approaches to understanding physical activity demonstrate the breadth of correlates that encompass intra-individual, inter-individual, environmental, and policy-related variables in physical activity performance. One longstanding intrapersonal correlate of interest is the relationship between personality traits—enduring individual-level differences in tendencies to show consistent patterns of thoughts, feelings, and actions—and physical activity.
Personality trait theories are broad in focus and differ in terms of proposed etiology, yet much of the recent research in physical activity has been with super traits in the five-factor model: neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Meta-analytic reviews suggest that conscientiousness and extraversion are positively associated with physical activity with some mixed evidence for a small negative relationship with neuroticism. The effect appears to be most pronounced with vigorous physical activities and less so with lower-intensity lifestyle activities and shows mixed evidence for whether proximal social cognitive variables (intention, self-efficacy) can mediate this relationship. More specific sub-traits show that facets of extraversion (excitement-seeking, activity) or conscientiousness (self-discipline, industriousness/ambition) have larger and more specific associations with particular types of physical activity or moderate key processes like the intention-behavior gap. Furthermore, personality appears to be linked to higher-intensity and adventure activities more than lower-intensity leisure physical activities. Contemporary longitudinal assessments of the bi-directionality of personality and physical activity have begun to advance our understanding of interconnectedness. Interventions that target personality traits to improve physical activity have been relatively understudied but hold some promise when used in tandem with larger theoretical approaches and behavioral change strategies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.